Werner Koch wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:23:28 +0000, Ben Laurie said:
Oops. What I said was that this seems like a candidate for having
flags in the PGP certificates that say what is supported by the
Sorry, I don't understand this. We do have these preferences since
the very beginning.
Sorry, not very well today, and it seems not thinking straight. So why
is there an issue with compatibility?
BTW, I see that 220.127.116.11. says "It is assumed that only algorithms listed
are supported by the recipient's software" but this language is not
carried forward into 18.104.22.168/9. In fact 22.214.171.124 explicitly rules out
indicating what exactly is supported ("...the key holder's software
might have no compression software").
"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff